We wanted to prepare a Classic Conditioning experiment using a Reaction Time as US task, however, I do not know how to program it in SuperLab 4.5.

In the experiment, a CS + of 5 second duration is presented (a simple geometric figure) and immediately after this stimulus a 0,4 s noise is presented. The participants have to respond by pressing the space bar as soon as they hear it.

In addition, we want to provide positive feedback, so that in cases where the participant responds quickly than the previous trial, a message of reinforcement appears on the screen (e.g you respond faster than the last trial), and no message when the response time is longer than the previous trial.

The problem is that I donīt know how to schedule a Reaction time task or feedback, if anyone can help me it would be great.

Thank you very much.

Arman

March 9th, 2017 01:51 PM

Go to the Feedback tab, and select the reaction time is too quick as a criterion. You can then present an event as a consequence of response time being below a certain threshold.

However, to satisfy your requirements, your threshold would need to be variable. Unfortunately, this cannot be done with SuperLab 4.

Please note that SuperLab 5 consists of timer parameters that would allow this behavior.

Daniel Gonzalez

March 16th, 2017 03:21 AM

Reaction time + Variable Feedback

Hello again,

As I previously said, I want to rule out a Classic Conditioning experiment using a Reaction Time as US task. I have now the Superlab 5 version, but I still donīt know how to schedule the Reaction time+Feedback procedure.

In this experiment, a 5 s. CS + is used (a simple geometric figure) and immediately after this stimulus a 0,4 s. noise is presented. The participants have to respond by pressing the space bar as soon as they hear it. We want to provide feedback only in that cases where the participants respond quicklier than the previous trial. We want to show them a message of reinforcement on the computer screen (e.g you respond faster than the last trial), and no message when the response time is longer than the previous trial.

Thank you very much.

Arman

March 16th, 2017 01:14 PM

1 Attachment(s)

I've attached an experiment that demonstrates this behavior. Please read through the notes.

The experiment revolves around 3 parameters: two timers and one text parameter that determines which timers have measured the current or previous trial.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Daniel Gonzalez

March 20th, 2017 06:58 AM

Hello again,

We have had success with the configuration that sent us, however, our experimental design requires a second CS- (blue triangle) stimulus and the already mentioned CS + (red square), also the interval between stimuli must be variable. When the experiment is started without CS- the timers work well, the feedback is displayed properly (with the criteria dictated above). However, if we add the CS- the results are not consistent, since feedback is not shown randomly and does not meet the pattern we want.

We do not know what the error is or how to configure it for the timers to ignore the CS-.

If this is not possible, another option could be the one carried out by Lipp and Vaitl (1990), which consists of comparing the mean RT of the last responses with the current RT. This is reflected in the papper on page 78: "For the RT-new group only, the subject's RT Was shown on the television screen, and enhanced Feedback was given. Whenever the current RT was Faster than the mean RT during the previous five Trials, a difference score was displayed together with Positive feedback (RT <mean, "good", 20 ms <D <40 ms, "very good"; D> 40 ms, "excellent").
Subjects were not informed about the scaling of The various feedbacks provided. Feedback information Lasted for 3 seconds on the screen. The Subject's response was a little button placed Underneath the left index finger as soon as the Imperative stimulus was sounded." (see Lipp, O. V., & Vaitl, D. (1990). Reaction time task as unconditional stimulus. The Pavlovian journal of biological science, 25(2), 77-83.)

Thank you again for your help.

Arman

March 20th, 2017 12:38 PM

1 Attachment(s)

Have you tried presenting the CS- in its own trial in the same block? See the experiment I've attached. Does this suit your requirements?

Daniel Gonzalez

March 21st, 2017 04:20 AM

1 Attachment(s)

The problem still persists, since in my procedure I need to introduce a variable interval-between-trials (ITI) and a randomized presentation of CSs. The RT that I want to measure is after finishing the CS + (specifically after the presentation of a tone presented immediately after the CS+) and give feedback if it is smaller than the RT to the previous trial. The error that I find is that the RT that is measured does not correspond to reality, since sometimes that criterion is not met (sometimes it gives feedback by responding more quickly than the previous trial but at other times not, and vice versa ).

I think that may be due to both CS- and ITI as follows: in an example of CS + sequence followed by another CS +, if we respond slow at first (e.g 5 sec) and very quickly after the second CS + (1 sec. ), the feedback appears. So far all correct, however, if we continue the sequence with a CS- and then a CS +, although after this CS + we respond faster than in the previous CS + (here 0.7 s instead of 1 s.), we do not receive feedback.

Thus, we believe that the RT can be measured from one bar pulse to the next one, instead of measuring the RT after the tone presented immediately after the CS +. In this way it would be understood why when a CS- is presented, that is to say, the interval between the CS + and therefore of pulsations is extended, no feedback is sent.

I attached an example of the procedure in superlab to see how it is produced.

PS: the response has to be immediately after the tone, and it can be within the interval of the tone, e.g if the tone lasts 0.4 sec. and if the participant responds to 0.3 sec, the answer would be worth it.

Thank you again for your help.

Arman

March 22nd, 2017 12:20 PM

1 Attachment(s)

I have divided the block into three trials: ITI, CS+, and CS-. I have also added a counter parameter (0 min, 1 max). Every time the ITI is presented, its trial rules randomize the counter and start the timer only when necessary. Depending on the randomized value and the When to Present options of the trials, only one of the CS+ or CS- trials will be (randomly) presented.

This should allow for: the timers only measuring CS+ trial; random presentation of stimuli; an ITI before each CS.

Take a look at the experiment attached.

Daniel Gonzalez

March 23rd, 2017 03:23 AM

We have tried the experiment and it works very well, but we are missing a couple of details that we do not know how to include in the experiment. It would be possible to establish a "rule" in the randomization to establish that no more than 2 identical trial appear consecutive? That is, no more than 2 CS + or 2 CS- can be displayed continuously. We would also like to make sure that each CS is only presented 10 times along the experiment (10 CS+ and 10 CS-, 20 in total)

In addition, we wanted to know if putting the ITI as variable (with trial levels of 1000ms, 2000ms and 3000ms) instead of fixed, the ITI rules would be affected, and therefore the timers.

Thank you again for your help.

Arman

March 23rd, 2017 12:57 PM

1 Attachment(s)

I have added two counter parameters: Consecutive CS+ and CS- Count. Each time a CS is presented, it increments its own counter and resets the other. This allows us to use the When to Present options to make sure that they are not presented more than twice in a row.

Something similar is done with the new Total CS+ and CS- Count parameters to prevent a CS from presenting more than 10 times.

Varying the ITI time limit will not affect the timing process for the CS+ trial. I've created the trial variable for you.